Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Connecticut River, East Haddam, CT, 11172-11174 [06-2105]
Download as PDF
11172
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules
consistent with RIS 2005–20, ‘‘Revision
to Guidance Formerly Contained in NRC
Generic Letter 91–18,’’ dated September
26, 2005 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML052020424) not to exceed 3 years
from the date of this Federal Register
notice, or consistent with the licensee’s
NFPA 805 transition schedule.
The Commission believes that the
proposed rule would not achieve its
objective. Therefore, the Commission
has decided to withdraw the proposed
rule.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 28th day
of February, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6–3128 Filed 3–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD01–06–004]
RIN 1625–AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Connecticut River, East Haddam, CT
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
temporarily change the drawbridge
operating regulations governing the
operation of the Route 82 Bridge, mile
16.8, across the Connecticut River at
East Haddam, Connecticut. This
proposed rule would allow the Route 82
Bridge to operate on a fixed opening
schedule from April 1, 2006 through
June 30, 2006. The bridge would open
at all times for commercial vessels after
at least a 24-hour advance notice and a
2-hour confirmation is given by calling
the number posted at the bridge. This
rule is necessary to facilitate
rehabilitation construction at the bridge.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
March 27, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Commander
(dpb), First Coast Guard District Bridge
Branch, One South Street, Battery Park
Building, New York, New York, 10004,
or deliver them to the same address
between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The telephone number is (212) 668–
7165. The First Coast Guard District,
Bridge Branch, maintains the public
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:29 Mar 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
docket for this rulemaking. Comments
and material received from the public,
as well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and will be available for inspection or
copying at the First Coast Guard
District, Bridge Branch, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
Ms.
Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First
Coast Guard District, (212) 668–7195.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (CGD01–06–004),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know if they reached us, please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
all comments and material received
during the comment period. We may
change this proposed rule in view of
them.
Regulatory Information
We anticipate making this temporary
rule effective in less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for
making this rule effective in less than 30
days after publication in the Federal
Register as the Route 82 Bridge repairs
currently scheduled to begin on April 1,
2006, are vital necessary repairs that
must be performed with all due speed
to assure the continued safe and reliable
operation of the bridge. Any delay in
making this rule effective as soon as
possible would not be in the best
interest of public safety and the marine
interests that use the Connecticut River.
Failure to start the rehabilitation repairs
on time could result in an unscheduled
bridge operation failure.
However, the Coast Guard desires to
allow as much time as possible for
public participation and comment
during this rulemaking process. Thus,
we are allowing the comment period to
run into the 30 day time period
normally included between publication
and the effective date.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting; however, you may submit a
request for a meeting by writing to the
First Coast Guard District, Bridge
Branch, at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that one
would aid this rulemaking, we will hold
one at a time and place announced by
a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The Route 82 Bridge has a vertical
clearance of 22 feet at mean high water,
and 25 feet at mean low water in the
closed position. The existing
drawbridge operating regulations listed
at 33 CFR 117.205(c), require the bridge
to open on signal at all times; except
that, from May 15 to October 31, 9 a.m.
to 9 p.m., the bridge is required to open
for recreational vessels on the hour and
half hour only. The bridge is required to
open on signal at all times for
commercial vessels.
The bridge owner, Connecticut
Department of Transportation, has
requested a temporary rule to facilitate
electrical and mechanical rehabilitation
at the Route 82 Bridge.
Under this temporary rule the Route
82 Bridge would open from April 1,
2006, through June 30, 2006, on signal
at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 8 p.m.,
daily. The bridge would open for
commercial vessels at any time after a
24-hour notice with a 2-hour
confirmation is given by calling the
number posted at the bridge.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed change would amend
33 CFR 117.205 by suspending
paragraph (c) and adding a new
temporary paragraph (d) that would list
the temporary bridge opening schedule
for the Route 82 Bridge.
This temporary rule is necessary to
facilitate the rehabilitation construction
at the Route 82 Bridge in order to
maintain the bridge in good operable
condition.
This proposed change would allow
the Route 82 Bridge to open from April
1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, at 5:30
a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 8 p.m., daily. The
bridge would open at any time for
commercial vessels after a 24-hour
notice, with a 2-hour confirmation, is
given by calling the number posted at
the bridge.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, and
does not require an assessment of
E:\FR\FM\06MRP1.SGM
06MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules
potential costs and benefits under
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of
Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation, under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary.
This conclusion is based on the fact
that vessel traffic will still be able to
transit through the Route 82 Bridge
under a fixed opening schedule that is
expected to meet the present and
anticipated needs of navigation.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under
section 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This conclusion is based on the fact
that vessel traffic will still be able to
transit through the Route 82 Bridge
under a fixed opening schedule that is
expected to meet the present and
anticipated needs of navigation.
If you think that your business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity
and that this rule would have a
significant economic impact on it,
please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it
qualifies and how and to what degree
this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
we want to assist small entities in
understanding this proposed rule so that
they can better evaluate its effects on
them and participate in the rulemaking.
If the rule would affect your small
business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please contact us in writing
at, Commander (dpb), First Coast Guard
District, Bridge Branch, One South
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:29 Mar 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
Street, New York, NY 10004. The
telephone number is (212) 668–7165.
The Coast Guard will not retaliate
against small entities that question or
complain about this rule or any policy
or action of the Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no
new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501–3520.).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on State or local governments and
would either preempt State law or
impose a substantial direct cost of
compliance on them. We have analyzed
this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year.
Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do
discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically
significant rule and would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to
safety that might disproportionately
affect children.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
11173
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under that order because
it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has not designated it as a significant
energy action. Therefore, it does not
require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through the Office of
Management and Budget, with an
explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., specifications
of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling
procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that there are no factors in this case that
would limit the use of a categorical
exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the
Instruction. Therefore, this proposed
rule is categorically excluded, under
E:\FR\FM\06MRP1.SGM
06MRP1
11174
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 43 / Monday, March 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules
figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e) of the
Instruction, from further environment
documentation because this action
relates to the promulgation of operating
regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. Under figure 2–1,
paragraph (32)(e) of the instruction, an
‘‘Environmental Analysis Checklist’’ is
not required for this rule. Comments on
this section will be considered before
we make the final decision on whether
to categorically exclude this rule from
further environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Bridges.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:29 Mar 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
Regulations
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33
CFR 1.05–1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106
Stat. 5039.
2. From April 1, 2006 through June
30, 2006, § 117.205 is amended by
suspending paragraph (c) and adding a
temporary paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 117.205
Connecticut River.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) The draw of the Route 82 Bridge,
mile 16.8, at East Haddam, shall open
on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 8
p.m., daily. The draw shall open on
signal for commercial vessels at any
time after at least a 24-hour advance
notice and a 2-hour confirmation is
given by calling the number posted at
the bridge.
Dated: February 24, 2006.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 06–2105 Filed 3–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–05–P
E:\FR\FM\06MRP1.SGM
06MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 43 (Monday, March 6, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11172-11174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-2105]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD01-06-004]
RIN 1625-AA09
Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Connecticut River, East Haddam,
CT
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to temporarily change the drawbridge
operating regulations governing the operation of the Route 82 Bridge,
mile 16.8, across the Connecticut River at East Haddam, Connecticut.
This proposed rule would allow the Route 82 Bridge to operate on a
fixed opening schedule from April 1, 2006 through June 30, 2006. The
bridge would open at all times for commercial vessels after at least a
24-hour advance notice and a 2-hour confirmation is given by calling
the number posted at the bridge. This rule is necessary to facilitate
rehabilitation construction at the bridge.
DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before March 27, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander
(dpb), First Coast Guard District Bridge Branch, One South Street,
Battery Park Building, New York, New York, 10004, or deliver them to
the same address between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The telephone number is (212) 668-7165. The
First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, maintains the public docket
for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as
well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for
inspection or copying at the First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch,
7 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer,
First Coast Guard District, (212) 668-7195.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name
and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking (CGD01-06-
004), indicate the specific section of this document to which each
comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit
all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than
8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like to know if
they reached us, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or
envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during
the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them.
Regulatory Information
We anticipate making this temporary rule effective in less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective in less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register as the Route 82 Bridge repairs
currently scheduled to begin on April 1, 2006, are vital necessary
repairs that must be performed with all due speed to assure the
continued safe and reliable operation of the bridge. Any delay in
making this rule effective as soon as possible would not be in the best
interest of public safety and the marine interests that use the
Connecticut River. Failure to start the rehabilitation repairs on time
could result in an unscheduled bridge operation failure.
However, the Coast Guard desires to allow as much time as possible
for public participation and comment during this rulemaking process.
Thus, we are allowing the comment period to run into the 30 day time
period normally included between publication and the effective date.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public meeting; however, you may
submit a request for a meeting by writing to the First Coast Guard
District, Bridge Branch, at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why
one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The Route 82 Bridge has a vertical clearance of 22 feet at mean
high water, and 25 feet at mean low water in the closed position. The
existing drawbridge operating regulations listed at 33 CFR 117.205(c),
require the bridge to open on signal at all times; except that, from
May 15 to October 31, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., the bridge is required to open
for recreational vessels on the hour and half hour only. The bridge is
required to open on signal at all times for commercial vessels.
The bridge owner, Connecticut Department of Transportation, has
requested a temporary rule to facilitate electrical and mechanical
rehabilitation at the Route 82 Bridge.
Under this temporary rule the Route 82 Bridge would open from April
1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and
8 p.m., daily. The bridge would open for commercial vessels at any time
after a 24-hour notice with a 2-hour confirmation is given by calling
the number posted at the bridge.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
This proposed change would amend 33 CFR 117.205 by suspending
paragraph (c) and adding a new temporary paragraph (d) that would list
the temporary bridge opening schedule for the Route 82 Bridge.
This temporary rule is necessary to facilitate the rehabilitation
construction at the Route 82 Bridge in order to maintain the bridge in
good operable condition.
This proposed change would allow the Route 82 Bridge to open from
April 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 8
p.m., daily. The bridge would open at any time for commercial vessels
after a 24-hour notice, with a 2-hour confirmation, is given by calling
the number posted at the bridge.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of
[[Page 11173]]
potential costs and benefits under 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of
Management and Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. It is not
``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation, under the regulatory
policies and procedures of DHS is unnecessary.
This conclusion is based on the fact that vessel traffic will still
be able to transit through the Route 82 Bridge under a fixed opening
schedule that is expected to meet the present and anticipated needs of
navigation.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under section 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This conclusion is based on the fact that vessel traffic will still
be able to transit through the Route 82 Bridge under a fixed opening
schedule that is expected to meet the present and anticipated needs of
navigation.
If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
Assistance for Small Entities
Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact us in writing at, Commander
(dpb), First Coast Guard District, Bridge Branch, One South Street, New
York, NY 10004. The telephone number is (212) 668-7165. The Coast Guard
will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
Collection of Information
This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).
Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this proposed rule would not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
Taking of Private Property
This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.
Civil Justice Reform
This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Protection of Children
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
Energy Effects
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.
Technical Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule under Commandant Instruction
M16475.1D, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that there are no factors in this
case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this proposed rule is
categorically excluded, under
[[Page 11174]]
figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction, from further
environment documentation because this action relates to the
promulgation of operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges.
Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the instruction, an
``Environmental Analysis Checklist'' is not required for this rule.
Comments on this section will be considered before we make the final
decision on whether to categorically exclude this rule from further
environmental review.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Regulations
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g); section 117.255 also issued
under the authority of Pub. L. 102-587, 106 Stat. 5039.
2. From April 1, 2006 through June 30, 2006, Sec. 117.205 is
amended by suspending paragraph (c) and adding a temporary paragraph
(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 117.205 Connecticut River.
* * * * *
(d) The draw of the Route 82 Bridge, mile 16.8, at East Haddam,
shall open on signal at 5:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 8 p.m., daily. The
draw shall open on signal for commercial vessels at any time after at
least a 24-hour advance notice and a 2-hour confirmation is given by
calling the number posted at the bridge.
Dated: February 24, 2006.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 06-2105 Filed 3-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-05-P